Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
CSPAN 16
MSNBCW 13
MSNBC 12
CSPAN2 4
KNTV (NBC) 3
WRC (NBC) 3
CNN 2
CNNW 2
CNBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 65
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 65 (some duplicates have been removed)
believe there is a better way to reduce the deficit. the president's sequester should be replaced with spending cuts and reforms. that will start us on the path to balancing the budget in ten years. there is no balance in terms of revenue. the question is are congress and the white house headed for yet another big showdown. to come to us from washington to answer that question is karen bass from california. thank you for coming to the war room. >> thank you for having me again. >> jennifer: you bet. so the republicans are saying that obama's plan as he announced today are dead on arrival. are they serious? is this just posturing before they reach a deal? >> i certainly hope it is because the fact of the matter is we're three weeks away from the hammer falling. what the president has called for is for the republican majority to act responsibly. why on earth would they want to send our economy into another recession. if we can't come to a grand deal by march 1st. what the president has said and the democratic leadership hats said is okay do another short-term proposal but make it ba
, the driving passion for mr. boehner in these fiscal debates is his conviction that trillion deficits are sapping the country of its energy and prosperity. trillion deficits, his driving passion. everybody loves john boehner's passion. but this is supposedly what he feels so passionate about. this is a chart of the country's budget deficit levels every year. red bars are president bush's deficits from 2008 and 2009. blue bars are president obama's deficits. those really big bars are when the whole world economy crashed, including ours. remember that? you notice how the deficit gets smaller when the bars are blue over time? see how they're getting shorter as you go to the right? today the congressional budget office released their deficit projection for 2013. so for this upcoming year, the nonpartisan cbo. according to them under president obama the deficit is slated to continue to shrink, as it has been under president obama. but the supposedly gigantic growth of those deficits is why congressional republicans are committed to us lurching from self-imposed crisis to self-imposed crisi
really needed was deficit reduction. and this is a period in which we didn't come to a big deficit reduction deal. what we did is raise taxes. it cut the deficit a bit, but not a big deal. what happened to the markets? somehow we kept adding jobs and the stock market did really well. it all worked out reasonably okay. so here is what we learned. cutting government spending hurts economic growth. no doubt about it. that means doing it in a bad economy may not be such a good idea. but increasing taxes a bit, not coming to the big deficit deal. the private sector and even the markets don't seem all that concerned. the last week should cause a lot of people in washington to re-think what they're doing. i am not optimistic that will happen. joining me now, former economic adviser to vice president joe biden, jared bernstein, a man who is always re-thinking what he is doing, how are you? >> i'm fine, ezra. >> and what else did you see in the reports? you got a good eye, what caught yours? >> one thing i saw was the revisions to last year's employment growth was such that i thought we wer
have worked together to reduce our deficit by $2.5 trillion. that is a good start, but to get the rest of the way, we need a balanced set of reforms. for example, we need to lower the cost of health care like programs like medicare. we cannot pass the burden. these reforms must go hand-in- hand with eliminating excess spending in our tax code so that the wealthiest cannot take advantage of loopholes and reductions that are not available to most americans. 2012 can be a year of solid growth and more jobs and higher wages. -- 2013 can be a year of solid growth and more jobs and higher wages. everyone in washington needs to focus on what is right for the country, on what is right for you and your families. that is how we will get our economy moving faster. it will strengthen our middle class. we will build a country that rewards the effort and determination of every single american. thank you. have a great weekend. >> hello. my name is susan brooks. it is a pleasure to speak to you from my home state on indiana. my husband and i have raised two children here. i've been a us attorney for t
and revenue growth? clarification from washington. a grand bargain encompassing a deficit reduction for ten years like tax reform and titlement reform. discretionary titlement reform. and debt extension for maybe two years. first, the recession needs it stabilize there. but a clear road to fiscal, banking reforms and indication that europe is serious about improving competitiveness. third, resumption of growth in emerging economies led by china. finally, the fed successfully engineering a modest increase in interest rates without unleashing run away inflation. i know, tall orders. >> this is a tall order, bob. >> but this would create a huge boost of business confidence. capital expenditures and hiring would increase and revenues would rise. finally, sue, on a day when the dow passed 14,000, it is forth while noting that the last time the dow passed 14,000, valuations were much higher with the ratio for the s&p at that time was 22. about 14 right now. what does that mean? well, historic average for the s&p 500 is 15, it means the market was way overvalued, sue, in 2007. today it is somewhat
apiece saying how the trust deficit is hurting the economy. what are you trying to say about that? guest: we usually do not talk about trust deficits. talk about trade, budget deficits, things we can measure. i'm talking about a breakdown of trust in american society, in particular in the institutions that make our economy go. when you look at measures of trust from surveys like a gallup or the pugh institute -- the pew institute, or even newspapers, congress, large corporations, banks, public schools, they have all been going down for many years. for a lot of them, this decline in trust was intensified leading up to and going into the financial crisis. there are a lot of reasons for these things we can talk about. what we were trying to get at in the story that -- is that this matters to the economy, and trust breaks down. there was nobel prize-winning economist who 40 years ago said that every commercial transaction has within it an element of trust. when you trust your counter party, you're more likely to engage in a transaction. when trust begins to fray, and people become suspicious
to reduce a deficit, he said the answer will require sacrifice from everyone. >> well, i don't think the issue right now is raising rates. the question is if we're going to be serious about reducing our deficit, can we combine some smart spending cuts, because there is still some waste in government. can we reform our health care programs in particular, because we spend a lot more on health care than every other country does, and we don't get better outcomes. so there is a lot of waste in the system. and there are things that we can do to reduce health care costs. and can we close some loopholes and deductions that folks who are well connected and have a lot of accountants and can take advantage of, so they end up paying lower rate that's an bus driver or a cop. can we close some of those loop holes? if we combine those things together, then we cannot only reduce our deficit, but we can continue to invest in things like education and research and things that will help us grow. >> meantime, the president leaves washington tomorrow for minnesota to make his case for new gun restriction
to lower the devers, but americans do not -- to lower the deficit, but americans do not support sacrificing real spenged cuts for more tax hikes. the president's sequester should be replaced with spending cuts and reforms that put us on a path to balance a budget over the next 10 years. the american people believe that the tax question has been settled. they know the president called for a balanced approach to the debt. combination of revenues and spending cuts, and they know he's gotten his revenue. the american people do not believe the president will use further tax revenues to lower the debt. and haven't seen this president attempt to spend his way into prosperity over the last four years, they know he'll spend it. the president doesn't believe we have a spending problem. he general winly believes the government -- genuinely believes the government spending causes economic growth. if that were true, the economy today would be thriving. it isn't thriving. the unemployment rate is still nearly 8% and rising. small businesses like the one i ran are struggling. middle class families, those
times" economist argued why the u.s. should spend now and worry about deficit reduction later. here it is. >> dashing spending when you still have depressed economy is really destructive. it's probably even counterproductive even in purely fiscal terms. we should be sustaining government spending until we have a stronger economic recovery. >> this is not a hard call. as long as we have 4 million people who have been unemployed for more than a year, this is not a time to be worrying about reducing the budget deficit. give me something that looks more like a normal employment situation and i'll become a deficit hawk but not now. >> do you subscribe to that, jared? or is that too extreme? >> not at all. i think paul's exactly right. paul and i share the following thing. we're deficit doves in a down economy, and deficit hawks in a strong economy. at a time like this, what you really need is faster growth. by the way, not only will that help put more people to work, but it will actually help reduce your budget deficit ironically because those people will be working, paying taxes, they w
gdp calculation rises, government versus consumption plus investment and minus your trade deficit, right? so if it's not going to consumption and it's going into the pockets of the top 1% or whatever, why aren't we seeing that reflected in investment? in fact, we saw very good business and investment numbers in the latest economic data. where are those dollars disappearing to? >> people invest when there's no return. >> excess capacity, you're not going to build more excess capacity just because the fed has low interest rates. i mean, if you look at investment overall, before the crisis, about 40% of all investment was in real estate. now, that is going to be damp dampened just because we built too many houses. >> and we had a bust, right? >> and we had a bust. the good news was a lot of them were showedly built and they'll fall apart and we'll have to reconstruct them. >> thank heavens. >> but the fact is, we overbuilt. the other part is actually not doing badly, given how weak demand is. it's not a lack of money. it's not the weaknesses in our financial system. that was one of t
out of washington to get our deficits under control. hopefully, we do not have to many quarters where we end up in negative territory. this is not an economy growing six percent and can hinder those bibles easily. host: magnolia, texas, david, better. caller: [indiscernible]we are doing great here. i noticed the super bowl is forming dollars per minute. everything is packed. all of the football stadiums. i do not see any recession. host: you said you are doing better why? caller: i live 15 miles from where they are building the number one country in the world. we are getting roads. it is unbelievable around here. we have job signs everywhere. as far as the savings, when interest rates are 1.5%, who will put their money in the bank? bernanke wants you to put it in stocks. that is why there is no interest rate. i took my money for years ago when i bought those rifles. i have made so much money on them. it is unbelievable. host: he mentioned social security. there is a category about the social safety net. guest: we use the term government social benefits to cover quite a few different p
in my view are willing to basically deficit spend and run us into a fiscal problem. republicans are unwilling to touch revenue so say let -- let's deficit spend and democrats are unwilling to address government spending so they deficit spend. both sides which is why this country does not trust washington. >> i want to get quickly to another issue, chuck hagel's confirmation hearing this week. not even the white house would defend his performance. here's a piece of it. >> i support the president's strong position on containment, as i said. if i said that, meant to say that i -- obviously his position on containment, we don't have a position on containment. >> we do have a position on containment, which is that we do not favor containment. >> he was kind of a surprise there from chuck hagel, probably not going to hurt his chances of confirmation, is even getting some republicans -- >> i think he's going to make it but if you have to clarify your clarification, you're in trouble, no. i mean if we compare, for instance, what he went through with what hillary clinton did with the ben
to the deficit. on that list of attendees for that meeting include marshall fitz from the center for american progress. ben jealous from the naacp and richard from the afl-cio. later in the day the president is meeting separately with a group of business leaders. that includes lloyd from goldman sachs, from yahoo and kent from coca-cola. congress has the next three and a half months to run up the deficit as much as it wants. the house and senate extended the debt ceiling. president obama has signed the no budget, no pay act of 2013. not only does that put off the nation's debt obligations until may 18th, it also withholds pay for a number of congressmen and womenless women unless they pass a budget by april. >>> eight senators have voted to block the violence against women act. that bill would protect victims of domestic violence and this particular version extends that care to illegal immigrants, native americans and lgbt members. senators who voted against considering that bill include ted cruz, marco rubio and rand paul, all republicans. more bill's up next. stay with us. to me now? you k
, yes, deficits and taxes and sequesters and potential government shutdowns, debt ceiling, we'll talk about that stuff. but we'll talk about it from the perspective on how we're making sure someone works hard in this country. a cop, teacher, a construction worker, or a reception worker, they can make it if they work hard. their kids can make it and dream bigger dreams than they have achieved. obviously, a lot of what we'll be working on over the next few weeks is going to be on how do we deal with this sequester issue. i want to make this quick point. i had a press conference this week in which i reiterated that i'm prepared, eager, and ang shouse that ends this government by crisis that every two week or every two months or every six months we are threatening this hard recovery, are finally housing is picking up and real estate is doing better and unemployment numbers are still too high. we're geing job growth and manufacturing is doing well and we continue to have these self-inflicted crisis here in washington where suddenly someone taps the brakes. what i said this week was i want
the economy and put us on a sustainable budget, bring our deficits down in a responsible, balanced way. >> does the president -- considering what the defense cuts did to the contraction of the u.s. economy in the fourth quarter, dois the president goi to be more aggressive in trying to find a way to stop the so-called sequester, the automatic defense cuts that would go through, which could it looks like now -- we already know the economic impact defense cuts have had last quarter. these would obviously slow down the economy even more. is the president going to refocus on this. >> the president has been focused on this for some time. the president made a submission to the super committee a year ago or so, which would have reduced our deficits in a balanced way, eliminated the sequester and his negotiations with the congress on the fiscal cliff. he did the same thing. so this is something that the president has provided a plan. the sequester is bad policy. it's something that we should eliminate. it wasn't intended to take place. and we got a taste for the impact that the sequester might
washington journal they talk about the recent article suggesting that a trust deficit by americans toward government and financial sector could be holding back the economic recovery. my cartoons depict can da that and humor. why started the cartoon, they were native characters and native situations. and my audience was geared toward natives. in the last four or five years they have become more universal where they stilled to the mainstream dominant culture. it's more universal now. i'm inspired by the people that are that i grew up with. my friend, my family, members of my tribe. and basically watching people and some of the things they do. it's surprising, if you pay attention to what people do and what people say, there's a lot of humor you can find in that, you know, making your own twists and certain things. >> people who have read my cartoons for the first time. i hope they take with them the appreciation of a native culture and native way of life. because it's not always depicted correctly in cinema or in books. but this cartoon coming from a genuine native american and these are my
spending, investments in military power, reinvest it elsewhere. not so much cut the deficit, but use the money saved for his priorities, his domestic priorities. closer? >> yeah. >> okay. >> oh, no, i just want the mic back. closer to me. this is the problem with us having three mics, and i apologize. tom, i just want to push you on a question and then actually segway to fred to talk about the wars we theoretically can fight. part of the problem is the notion that we don't have wars that we want to fight, and that is in some ways an acceptable notion. a man who was elected as commander and chief, and he gets to make those decisions. the american people voted him into office, and in some ways the president is absolutely right to suggest that he has a mandate in these areas. the real question is the impact that these decisions have on the threat environment that the united states is in. for most of history, we don't talk about this very much, we have maintained a strong military not so that we can fight, but so that we cannot fight. and the other point i think that tom made and this is
this week. the ongoing debate over the rising debt and deficit and how to rein in government spending. here is a portion of the address. [video clip] >> i recently voted to present the democratic majority in the u.s. senate with a simple but powerful challenge. pass a budget, or you do not get paid. by forcing senate democrats to finally live up to one of the most basic responsibilities of governing, we are presenting them with a golden opportunity to confront and fall -- solve our spending program. we are holding president obama accountable for the sequestered cuts he first proposed in 2011. republicans want to replace the sequester, which is a series of harmful across the board cuts with better, common-sense cuts and reforms. all of this will require democrats to finally get serious about the spending problem. each of the last two years, the republican-led house has passed a responsible budget that addresses what is driving the debt to put our country on a path to prosperity. unfortunately, it has been for years some senate democrats last pass the budget. 1000, 375 days to be exact. -- 16
a chart yesterday that the deficit has already fallen from $1 trillion to $648 billion with the cuts they did in 2011. as far as taxes, they need to change the tax code. businesses need to pay their fair share. i get $22,000 in my civil service and social security. i paid $448 in taxes last year. i am 76 years old. i am barely surviving. host: you mentioned at the beginning that your daughter-in- law, where she employed with a company that depended on government financing? >> yes, some government contracts, so they froze things to try to save jobs and then last friday they laid off five people. -- they froze hiring. host: willie is with us on the line. caller: i look at it like this, when you have a drought, in order to break the drought, everybody has to pay for it. a storm, you have to have a hurricane or a tornado to break a drought. some people are going to get flooded out. so i hope that it will go through. let it do what it is supposed to do and get this stuff straightened out. everybody's looking out for themselves. i worked for general motors. the only thing that got general
. it is important for us, whether we are talking about this issue or our deficit issue, to understand the demographic changes that are happening in and around the country. it is also the case -- i know you have been talking about manufacturing. we have a lot of jobs in this country that are unfilled. as a former superintendent of schools, i can tell you that my first priority is that we have to fill those jobs here. we are doing a horrendous job of preparing people for the stem fields that are required to make sure this country actually leads the world in advanced manufacturing. there is so much more we can do. we have not begun to do what we need to do for kids in this country to be ready for the 21st century. while we do that, it seems to me that it makes no sense for us to be saying to people that have acquired advanced degrees here and our foreign nationals, whose education we subsidized, but for a answer, because of obsolete caps that do not make sense, if that that ought to go build a business to compete with people in the united states. we need those folks here, to be able to d
a priority? >> kerry has said he wants to focus on the middle east, and that has been a deficit in terms of the israeli-palestinian track. certainly, i mean, the arab spring made it much more difficult, much more complicated, but some would argue made it more necessary. >> well, yeah. the middle east is also one of the drains that can suck all the oxygen out of the room. you know, you could get involved in it and get sucked down all these different kind of rabbit holes that exist in the middle east. syria, israel, palestine, egypt, iran, iraq which could, you know, get rough, afghanistan, which is a problem. all of those things are, i guess, threads that he could pull on that could leave him not enough time to deal with the trans-atlantic relationship, to deal with china, to deal with our neighbors like mexico where their priority issues. to deal with rebuilding the international institutions that need to be rebuilt. i think he has to be a bit careful not to fall into that trap. >> finally, what about iran and whether we are going to be caught up in something that israel launches or that
or not tall from the standpoint of the deficit. the second point i want to make is in line with what bob said. if you were to make a typology of a foreign policy challenges of the united states, it might go something like this. there are crises that involve the of the values and the interest and the interests but not the values and both with some overlap. we pursue our interests hopefully not the point that we are right of a moral crisis that we generate. there are certain challenges which do not seem to involve our interests very much but to bring our values and to question and the classic example of that would have been rwanda and i will get back to that in a moment and then there was a majority of foreign policy challenges. syria and given the magnitude of the humanitarian crisis, the strategic importance of the country there is no greater blow that can be dealt to iran at this moment than the fall of the assad regime from there is no greater blow that can be dealt to hezbollah are dealt to hamas the in the fall of the regime. if one wants to be a coldhearted realist and put together of th
a $16 trillion deficit, 51 million people on food stamps. our culture is an entitlement culture and yet we're going after 13 million people who have an immigration problem. hey, i'm all for vetting them. how about reverse discrimination for once in this country. if we're going to demand exceptionalism, we should have it towards the immigrants whether they come legally or illegally and also go back to americans who are u.s. citizens. >> are you talking about expelling americans? >> i'm all for demotion of citizenship. i agree with you. it may be extreme. but here's my point. how many of you. >> keep it short. >> how many of you have a trouble in a third world country and you come back to america and have a different experience about exceptionalism. what about reverse immigration? >> i do not support the deportation of american citizens but if that were to be a policy, what you would do is save hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the welfare state because immigrants are less likely to use welfare each when naturalized and americans who are poor. that's an interesting result of that.
one with budget deficits. immigration is not what hurts them, and it is not standing in the way of aiding them. in 2007, the congressional budget office found that legalizing undocumented immigrants would increase revenue by $48 billion, while costing only $3 billion increased public services. and that is before you get into the broader economic benefits. there are very few free lunches in public policy. usually it is a realm of hard choices, but taking advantage of our unique position as the country with the world's best and brightest, desperately a way to go? that is surely correct. >>> the pain of mccain. let's play "hardball." ♪ >>> i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home, the most famous of them is angrier than ever. why is america, why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate? the ticked off vitriol against chuck hagel, what is it about? is it for show? is it about something hagel said in the cloakroom? is it the unfairness of vietnam itself, that
to the deficit, and i'm just worried that one day we're going to wake up and the market's eyes are going to open up and say wait a minute, look at all these debt and start hitting the wrong way. but look. so far so good. for whatever reason the market likes what it sees, and i never argue with the market. it's kind of stupid to do that. i think you would be run over by a train if you bet against it right now. >> heather: gary kaltbaum joining us. thank you so much. we appreciate your insight as always. >> my pleasure. thank you. >> gregg: so he gave us the barney cam. remember that, and he was by president bush's side throughout his eight years in the white house. what the former president is now saying about his beloved scottish terrier. yeah the barney cam. >> heather: hours before the big game, gregg, new developments and allegations involving nfl player ray lewis. >> gregg: really? i'm so stunned. i'm surprised about this. >> heather: he's speaking out about this. >> gregg: he is? he's talking now? he wasn't really talking before. i'm stunned. >> heather: we'll hear what he has to say. >> i
worked together to reduce our deficit by $2.5 trillion. that is a good start, but to get the rest of the way, we need a balanced set of reforms. for example, we need to lower the cost of health care like programs like medicare. we cannot pass the burden. these reforms must go hand-in- hand with eliminating excess spending in our tax code so that the wealthiest cannot take advantage of loopholes and reductions that are not available to most americans. 2013 can be a year of solid growth and more jobs and higher wages. everyone in washington needs to focus on what is right for the country, on what is right for you and your families. that is how we will get our economy moving faster. it will strengthen our middle class. we will build a country that rewards the effort and determination of every single american. thank you. have a great weekend. >> hello. my name is susan brooks. it is a pleasure to speak to you from my home state on indiana. my husband and i have raised two children here. i've been a u.s. attorney for this area and starting last month, one of the state voices in the u.s
of our deficit. without just passing the burden off to seniors. these reforms must go hand-in- hand with eliminating excess ending in our tax code, though that the wealthiest individuals and biggest corporations cannot take advantage of loopholes and deductionsnew york not billable to most americans. 2013 can be a year of solid growth, more jobs, and higher wages. that will only happen if we put a stop to self-inflicted wounds in washington. everyone in washington needs to focus, not on politics, but on what is right for the country. what is right for you and your families. that is how we will get our economy growing faster, strengthen our middle class, and how we will build a country that rewards the effort and determination of every single american. thanks. have a great weekend. >> hello, my name is susan brooks. it is a pleasure to speak to you from hamilton county in my home state of indiana. i have lived in indiana just about all my life. i have been david and i have raised two children here. i have been a u.s. attorney for this area, and starting last month one of the hoosier
who has worked with budgets throughout my life, in order to deal with the deficit problem, you've got to deal with entitlements. you have to deal with revenues. and you have to deal with discretionary. all of it has to be part of a package. >> is he doing enough? >> i think he's pushing as hard as he can. >> should he be more public? >> well, look. the president of the united states has indicated the concern about sequester. he's indicated his concern about maintaining a strong national defense. and he's proposed a solution to this. the ball is in congress' court. they have got to take action to delay sequester. >> i want to move on to some of the hot spots. we'll start in north africa. a lot of news this week. here is the a.p. headline. u.s. limited in fight against north african militants. the united states is struggling to confront an uptick in threats in the newest hot spot with limited intelligence and few partners to help as the obama administration weighs who you to keep islamic extremists from jeopardizing national security without launching war. we want to put up a map here.
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 65 (some duplicates have been removed)